31 May
2014
31 May
'14
11:58 a.m.
On Saturday 31 May 2014 14:50:08 Peter Dimov wrote:
John Maddock wrote:
The rationale is that boost/throw_exception.hpp started off at least as a workaround for compilers with exception handling turned off (and is still required for such), the fact that it pulls in one header from Boost.Exception as well is a side effect, but a not-unhappy one in that it stops endless "why do I need to depend on Boost.Exception" discussions, if that one header shift to Config.
Or, we could move these two headers to a separate 'throw_exception' module, with Emil as maintainer.
Boost.ExceptionCore? Yes, I like that too.